ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2025
An investigational time-course study using an
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preclinical Methods: Nine healthy crossbred Suffolk sheep (skeletally mature females, 1.5-2 years old, approximately 150 pounds) underwent posterior surgical lumbar laminectomies at the L3 and L5 levels followed by epidural application of a novel hydrophobically modified chitosan-based hydrogel hemostatic agent (test article). The Surface Bleeding Severity Scale (SBSS) score was recorded immediately after completion of the laminectomy at baseline, and then at 3-, 6-, and 10-minute intervals following application of the hemostatic agent. Postoperative survival analysis, specifically focused on animal recovery and neurological status was performed. Clinical pathology including comprehensive vet screens (CVS), complete blood count (CBC) with differential, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) assays were completed. Animals were humanely sacrificed at 12 days (n=6), 30 days (n=1), 60 days (n=1), and 90 days (n=1). Necropsy was performed at the time of sacrifice and the operative levels were axially sectioned for histopathologic evaluation. Results: There were no neurologic, vascular, or infectious complications and animals exhibited normal recovery for this 2-level laminectomy surgical model. Complete intraoperative hemostasis was achieved in 16 out of 18 operative levels by the 3-minute interval and all 18 laminectomy levels demonstrated complete hemostasis by the 6-minute interval. Clinical pathology results were unremarkable. Histological characterization exhibited normal inflammatory and healing responses of the tissues at all postmortem time points, without evidence of abnormal spinal cord changes or infection. Residual test article was observed to decrease between the 30- and 60-day intervals, with no residual material in the epidural space observed at 90 days. Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrates the translational utility of the ovine model in evaluating the safety and efficacy of a novel hemostatic agent in the lumbar spine. Based on these early findings in intraoperative hemostasis, postoperative survival, and histologic analysis, additional studies of hemostatic agents using the ovine model are encouraged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.